Concerns over asbestos contamination at former High Birch school site

Demolition rubble on the former High Birch site

Concerns have been raised over the former High Birch school site in Marland after work was seen being carried out on the site in February, just two months after nearby residents received a letter indicating there were levels of asbestos on the site.

Rochdale Borough Council outlined the results of September 2016 survey in the letter, they took fourteen samples and monitored air around the site.

They found:

• Asbestos present in four samples from two locations of varying depths.
• The level was below detection in two samples.
• Two samples found above the level of detection.
• No airborne fibres.
• Elevated levels of benzopyrene, another contaminant ‘probably associated with coal and asphalt on site’

The letter advises: “The best solution for the site would be development, however, until this is undertaken, the site should be secured by adequate fencing to prevent public access. It should also break any pathway the contamination could follow from the site to the wider area. Stopping people from accessing the site would also prevent exposure to the other identified contaminant on the site.

“As the site is privately owned, it is the responsibility of the site owner to undertake the precautionary works. The council has contacted the site owner and requested suitable fences are installed. If an agreement is not obtained, the council will undertake work to secure the site and regain costs.

“When the site is developed in future, the results of this investigation will inform the planning process and suitable measures will have to be undertaken to enable the whole site to be developed.

“The public are advised not to enter the site.”

The site was reported to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and the Environment Agency following complaints about the demolition rubble on site.

However, a 2012 Freedom of Information response from the Health and Safety Executive said: “The AIB soffits were, as required, removed from site by a licensed asbestos removal contractor, ARD, and the certificate confirms that the area was thereafter safe for occupancy.

“The only other asbestos on the site was asbestos cement. In this form, the asbestos fibres are firmly secured in the cement substrate and cement does not require a licensed contractor for its removal.”

The school was demolished in 2012 following its sale to a private owner in 2011. A planning application for 22 dwellings was submitted in August 2012 by Greenstone Construction Limited, but was refused on the grounds that the development was in close proximity to neighbouring existing houses, resulting in a loss of privacy, and there were no provisions of affordable housing or contribution made for recreational open space. Greenstone Construction appealed the decision, but the appeal was rejected.

A further planning application was submitted by Greenstone Construction in 2016 for 23 houses, without a contribution to affordable housing or recreation space as ‘it would not be financially viable’.

Residents are still concerned about loss of privacy as the proposed houses are in similar locations.

In both planning applications, ‘no’ has been checked for questions regarding contamination:

• Land which is known to be contaminated.
• Land where contamination is suspected for all or part of the site.
• A proposed use that would be particularly vulnerable to the presence of contamination.

In 2004, the Council surveyed the site and found the presence of asbestos in: ceiling, spray residue, floor tiles, ceiling void, spray coating, pipes, debris, gaskets, walls, floor and wall insulation debris, textured coating, and cement roof soffit.

In addition, minutes from a Brimrod/Marland/Sudden Forum meeting in May 2011 confirmed asbestos was on site.

Concern about affecting nearby house resale values is also an issue because contaminated designated land within 400 yards has to be declared.

Nicola Rogers, Rochdale Borough Council public protection service manager, said: “The council requested that the site owner minimise the risk to the public by installing adequate fencing to prevent unauthorised access. The site owner put forward an alternative method to minimise risk which involved removing materials from site.

“The council, HSE and the Environment Agency have all been notified about the recent works on site. The site owner has submitted a planning application for the site which is scheduled to be considered at the Planning and Licensing Committee on 28 March 2017.

“If approved, the contamination issues will be addressed through conditions attached to the planning consent.”

A HSE spokesperson said: "It is difficult for us to comment on the decisions and assessments that were taken at the time as the inspector involved has since retired.

"We can say that the soffits were removed by a removal contractor with a HSE licence for the handling of asbestos. A certificate of clearance was subsequently provided by an independent analytical company. The decision to remove the soffits may have been made for one of a number of reasons including wear and tear, accidental damage or the education authority choosing to replace the asbestos containing soffits with a maintenance free material such as plastic.

"The primary legal requirement placed on duty holders is to manage the risk of asbestos rather than remove it altogether. If kept in good condition and appropriately managed, asbestos does not pose a hazard. The interventions undertaken by HSE focus on ensuring appropriate measures are in place to manage the risk so as to ensure the well-being of pupils and staff at the school.

“To comply with the legal requirements all schools constructed before 2000 should have an asbestos management register in place and ensure the condition of any asbestos that is present in the building is properly monitored."

Greenstone Construction did not respond to an invitation to comment.